Talk:Dieffenbachia

The dieffenbachia is extinct?

172.167.66.160: You have twice edited the article to say this plant is extinct without citing any sources, which I have reverted. This space is reserved for you to cite your sources if you want to change the article to say it is extinct again. Arrenlex 05:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

There are three growing from pots 20 feet from where I'm sitting as I write this. 140.147.236.194 (talk) 21:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Extremely poisonous?

I propose getting rid of the "charcoal treatment" - these are mentioned in old literature. Charcoal is NOT indicated in case of a local reaction (for which most of Diffenbachia are) because it's typically a localized reaction. Further, there is no good evidence to support the practice of using charcoal in this type of plant exposure. Dr. B (talk) 21:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dieffenbachia&diff=144543826&oldid=144328024

I googled the subject, and according to http://www.botanical-online.com/alcaloidesdiefenbaquiaangles.htm and http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/consumer/poison/Dieffsp.htm and http://www.blankees.com/house/plants/dumbcane.htm it is only moderately toxic, a fact which the article already addresses: "Chewing could result in death if swelling of the throat blocks the airway" and "Young children (at the age where they regularly put things into their mouths) are at risk of suffocation and death if they eat or chew on Dieffenbachia leaves. Some cats eat houseplants and flowers; they are similarly at risk." Saying the dieffenbachia is "one of the deadliest plants" seems to be extremely misleading and incorrect, so I have reverted it. If you have sources to the contrary, or arguments about why what you said is correct, please post them here when you edit again. Thanks! =) Arrenlex 16:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Dieffencbachia is almost never fatal. I have probably treated a couple dozen patients in the past 10-15 years with exposures and have not read of a single modern case report. Emedicine's book chapter notes there's only been a snigle fatality reported. http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/byname/plant-poisoning-oxalates.htm It's usually just extremely painful. In addition, it is *far* from the deadliest plant I can think of. Try Foxglove (Digitalis), Jimsonweed (Datura), "Deadly Nightshade", Castor Bean etc for some dangerous plants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.77.126.50 (talk) 23:38, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

FIXED. 98.203.251.157 (talk) 05:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

see also: Philodendron/dieffenbachia ingestions: are they a problem? Mrvos R; Dean BS; Krenzelok EP Author's Address: Pittsburgh Poison Center, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2583. Source: Journal Of Toxicology. Clinical Toxicology [J Toxicol Clin Toxicol] 1991; Vol. 29 (4), pp. 485-91. Publication Type: Journal Article Language: English Journal Information: Country of Publication: UNITED STATES NLM ID: 8213460 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 0731-3810 (Print) NLM ISO Abbreviation: J. Toxicol. Clin. Toxicol. Subsets: Core Clinical (AIM); MEDLINE MeSH Terms: Plant Poisoning/*epidemiology Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Infant; Male; Pennsylvania/epidemiology; Poison Control Centers; Retrospective Studies Abstract: Ingestions involving the philodendron/dieffenbachia members of the Arum family are allegedly associated with the development of intense irritation of mucous membranes, resulting in swelling of the tongue, lips and palate. Although numerous literature citations promote their toxicity, there are few case reports which substantiate a cause-effect relationship between ingestion and resultant symptomatology. To assess the toxic manifestations associated with the ingestion of these plants, a retrospective review of such cases reported to a Regional Poison Information Center was performed. 188 cases were identified and the integrity of the leaf had been broken in all cases. Philodendrons accounted for 67.5% and dieffenbachias for 32.5% of the cases. 72.8% involved children aged 4-12 months. Only 2.1% (4) of the patients were symptomatic (dieffenbachia-3; philodendron-1). In all cases, the symptoms occurred within 5 minutes of the exposure and were of short duration and the outcome was classified as minor. In this 24 month senses of 188 exposures, severe oral complications and the delayed development of symptoms were not observed. Entry Date(s): Date Created: 19920117 Date Completed: 19920117 Latest Revision: 20041117 Update Code: 20071207 PMID 1749055 Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cmedm&AN=1749055&site=ehost-live Cut and Paste: <A href="http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cmedm&AN=1749055&site=ehost-live">Philodendron/dieffenbachia ingestions: are they a problem?</A> Database: MEDLINE

and

Vet Hum Toxicol. 1999 Oct;41(5):335-8. Dieffenbachia species exposures: an evidence-based assessment of symptom presentation. Pedaci L, Krenzelok EP, Jacobsen TD, Aronis J. School of Pharmacy, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA. The literature often ascribes significant morbidity to Dieffenbachia exposures. However, poison center experience suggests a discordant view from that presented in the literature. This project determined if the symptoms described in the literature were consistent with clinical practice. To profile the symptoms reported in the literature, an extensive literature search using Medline and Webspirs (http:/(/)infoshare.library.pitt.edu/webspirs /webspirs.htm) was conducted to identify publications that described Dieffenbachia toxicity. Standard toxicology references and medical botany texts found in poison centers were used to profile symptoms in the tertiary literature; and an Internet search using the Savvy Search program (http:/(/)www.guaraldi.cs.colostate.edu:20 00) to search simultaneously all other search engines. The symptom information was compared to AAPCC TESS (1993-1996) symptom data reported on Dieffenbachia exposure reports. Twenty-three reference sources profiled the literature perspective on Dieffenbachia exposures. AAPCC TESS contained 10,796 Dieffenbachia exposures, and 34.7% of the reports documented symptoms. Oral irritation was reported in 18.2% of the reports and 92.6% of the queried literature listed this symptom (18.2%/92.6%). Additionally dermal pain = 8.7%/63.0%; vomiting = 2.6%/18.5%; erythema = 2.5%/5.3%; throat irritation = 2.3%/22.2%; dermal edema = 2.2%/3.7%; pruritis = 2.1%/7.4%; ocular irritation = 1.7%/44.4%; rash = 1.2%/29.6%; cough/choke = 1.1%/3.7%; loss of speech = 0%/29.6%; salivation = 0%/29.6%; respiratory obstruction = 0%/48.1%; death = 0%/11.18%. When multiple symptoms occurred the most common toxidrome was oral and throat irritation that occurred in 2.9% of the AAPCC TESS reports. There is similarity between the literature and the clinical experience with regard to the irritant properties of Dieffenbachia species, but there is also significant disparity because the literature fails to put the symptoms into a clinical frequency perspective. In general, the literature portrays Dieffenbachia exposures associated with more morbidity and mortality than what was reported in the AAPCC TESS clinical practice data. PMID 10509443 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] JGBang (talk) 17:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree, in fact many sites call it the 'mother in law plant' and 'dumb cane' because it can paralyse the vocal chords, not kill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.116.16 (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Take it easy: look here →

<quote>Many plants accumulate calcium oxalate crystals in response to surplus calcium, which is found throughout the natural environment.</quote> (Not at your home:) Lincoln Josh (talk) 13:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I searched a lot about this flower because a week ago a child died in Albania because he eat a piece of this flower. According to his mother his tongue go swollen and inflated(puffed) so fast and he couldn't breath. Also a friend a mine had the face specially the lips and nose numb for hours because she threw it from balcony accidentally and when she cleaned the place she smelt the smell of it. Albanian articles for the little boy who died. Some other article about how poison is it. Margott (talk) 10:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Which Dieffenbach?

While this article asserts, that Dieffenbachia is named to commemorate Johann Karl Ernst Dieffenbach, the german WP-page asserts:

Heinrich Wilhelm Schott, Direktor des Botanischen Gartens in Wien von 1845 bis 1865 benannte die Gattung nach seinem langjährigen Obergärtner de:Joseph Dieffenbach (1796–1863).
(=... named the genus according to his chief gardener JOSEPH Dieffenbach.)

Who is right? Which of the two Dieffenbach´s is commemorated? Pietersz (talk) 01:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

According to [1] it was named after J. F. Dieffenbach by Schott. It also says that J. F. Dieffenbach was a german physician and botanist, but it also lists a different birth and death dates (1794-1847) that don't conform to Johann Karl Ernst Dieffenbach's birth and death dates. It doesn't conform to de:Joseph Dieffenbach for that matter either. So I don't know myself. The book Aroids:Plants of the Arum Family by Deni Bown might have this information however.Chhe (talk) 04:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I've found out the paper where Schott describes Dieffenbachia for the first time. It was Für Liebhaber der Botanik

by HW Schott - Wiener Z. Kunst, 1829. Maybe the answer to the question might be in there. It will be tough to track down though; probably requires a library.Chhe (talk) 03:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Conditions

Dieffenbachia responds well to hot temperatures and humid climates.

Cancer treatment

I would like to remove the section "Cancer treatment" entirely, as the sources in the section do not give reasonable support to the claim. At most, the citation about antiangiogenesis gives some weight, but that source only speaks to Dieffenbachia seguine. Furthermore, I do not see any sources here that mention this practice (applying Dieffenbachia to as an antiangiogenesis inhibitor for cancer treatment) in any society, let alone the Philippines as is currently written. I am open to a rewording and section retitling for a focus on antiangiogenesis or cultural uses of Dieffenbachia with more sources, otherwise I will remove the section. ViterbiAlg (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

The section has since been removed. ViterbiAlg (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dieffenbachia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110716124034/http://www.srilankacollegeofpaediatricians.com/pubs/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20CC%20de%20Silva%20Oration%20Plant%20poisonin.pdf to http://www.srilankacollegeofpaediatricians.com/pubs/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20CC%20de%20Silva%20Oration%20Plant%20poisonin.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:32, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hyalinobatrachium fleischmanni

An editor has added the line "Dieffenbachia species are a common calling site for male Hyalinobatrachium fleischmanni frogs.". This claim is entirely on the basis of one study "TERRITORIAL AND REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR OF THE TROPICAL AMERICAN FROG CENTROLENELLA FLEISCHMANNI", with a follow up paper on the same study "THE EFFECT OF VEGETATION ON THE PROPAGATION OF CALLS IN THE NEOTROPICAL FROG CENTROLENELLA FLEISCHMANNI". The author of the study does not make the claim that this author has suggested. In the study Dieffenbachia merely happened to be the predominant low story broad leaf plant in the local area. The author implies that the genus of plant is not important, merely the size of the leaves. This is supported in "Local distribution and notes on reproduction of Vitreorana aff. eurygnatha (Anura: Centrolenidae) from Sergipe, Northeastern Brazil". Jameel the Saluki (talk) 10:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jameel the Saluki: it does seem sensible to have removed it. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2022 (UTC)